Why engine capacity-based diesel vehicle bans don't make any sense

This is a discussion on Why engine capacity-based diesel vehicle bans don't make any sense within The Indian Car Scene, part of the BHP India category; Originally Posted by tsk1979
The first type is Carbon Dioxide. The global warming gas. An efficient engine will produce less ...

The first type is Carbon Dioxide. The global warming gas. An efficient engine will produce less CO2. No rocket science there. If you want to make a decision to restrict CO2 decisions, you would ban all petrol cars. But clearly that was not done. So the decision is not about CO2

A bigger CC engine will consume more fuel than a smaller one in every burn. Simple logic, isn't it? But, as you have rightly said, CC has nothing to do with pollution, barring CO2. Which make me quote you. I don't think this comment is correct - "an efficient engine will produce less CO2"

In fact, an efficient engine should produce more CO2 (and less CO). Fossil fuels are hydrocarbons, if burnt cleanly (with ample oxygen to burn completely), only CO2 and water should be the byproduct of oxidation reaction that we call burning. Am I wrong?

Maybe the Government tries to use its various arms in a diplomatic and politically correct way to address unrelated issues.

That's a scary thought. That NGT thing is a SC initiative to overcome GOIs lethargy in this space (or at least as perceived by the SC, back then). NGT is headed by Swatanter Kumar who is a SC judge. You are implying that they are actually puppets in the hands of the GOI? Hmmm...

Lets hope, future decisions made also look at data rather than whims and fancies.

TSK: This is brilliant analysis! Pathetic to realize that the decision was arbitrary and not backed by any analysis. Unless of course NGT provides us with that now!

Also surprised that none of the affected manufacturers could come up with such datasets and put it in the public domain such that their interviews were backed by facts. That would have really made media dig more and people more aware.

That is fuel consumption/100km.
So 10kmph would mean 10L/100km
I have to research Tableau. Right now just used excel after some research.

Regrding lugging etc., these numbers are generated using test cycles of the certifying authority. This is where the controversy arose. There were specific software codes which determined if the vehicle was on a tester, and if so, they reduced the emissions.

Lets see if these agencies change their strategies.

That said, we need some ARAI data to make an informed decision for India. I am sure, the govt must be testing emission levels of new cars and keeping the data on record.

TSK: This is brilliant analysis! Pathetic to realize that the decision was arbitrary and not backed by any analysis. Unless of course NGT provides us with that now!

Also surprised that none of the affected manufacturers could come up with such datasets and put it in the public domain such that their interviews were backed by facts. That would have really made media dig more and people more aware.

There is good reason for this. The manufacturer who does this will be perceived to be anti - environmental even when if the data suggests otherwise. This could prove to a huge blow to the manufacturers who are already reeling under negative publicity like VW or struggling like Fiat. A write up in one of the national newspaper with the headline"Manufacturer does not agree with NGT" could spell disaster for a few manufacturers.

performance of engines under load, this is what should be tested, instead of just plugging in a particulate matter monitor onto a diesel car running with just the test driver. You need to conduct tests that actually make sense first, before making sweeping generalisations like 2000cc engines will pollute more than smaller engines.

As highly irritating as all this sounds to the common user, they have surely not bought their 2000+cc cars from funds provided by the govt, in a country like India, rarely are there any free lunches. Everything has come out of someone's pocket, and that someone has surely made money the hard way. Every km that they drive has been super-taxed by paying for premium petrol prices that are unheard of in the world and even in our impoverished neighbourhood. And they are again taxed at every toll booth, in excuse of police checking, road taxes, innumerable cesses and what not. And these silly organisations like tribunals, and Green Junta's makes sweeping judgements without consulting any stakeholders.

It just shows a kind of staggering contempt towards common Indians rather than any regard for environment that we live in. British went and another set of goons replaced them.

Brilliant analysis TSK!
If this ban is imposed in other cities, it will definitely kill the dreams and ideas of folks(including me) who are planning to upgrade to the premium segment in a few years or more!
There are a few thoughts in my head right now.
1. If the thinking of NGT is that bigger is the displacement the more harmful the vehicles are, then why haven't they curtailed the sale of commercial vehicles, HTV's and buses?
2. The state of HTV's in our country are so bad that one can tell that an old truck has just passed by observing the big cloud of sooty smoke which they emit which stays on even after a few minutes after the are long gone.
3. Bangaloreans will have experienced the above with the so called premium volvo buses which the BMTC operates in the city, those first batch of buses which joined the fleet some 8 years ago and still running!
Have these things been overlooked? (Do correct me if I'm wrong)
Or are they just targeting cars because they just want to?

Excellent eye-opening thread Tsk! This is what keeps our forum miles ahead of all others.
So, the 1.6 TDIs and 1.3 DDis are worse culprits than the huge Luxo barges. I will take my part to clarify the truth to some environmentalists I know with your compilation.

A bigger CC engine will consume more fuel than a smaller one in every burn. Simple logic, isn't it? But, as you have rightly said, CC has nothing to do with pollution, barring CO2. Which make me quote you. I don't think this comment is correct - "an efficient engine will produce less CO2"

In fact, an efficient engine should produce more CO2 (and less CO). Fossil fuels are hydrocarbons, if burnt cleanly (with ample oxygen to burn completely), only CO2 and water should be the byproduct of oxidation reaction that we call burning. Am I wrong?

I think an efficient engine should produce less CO2 per mile. That is the reason diesel engines produce less CO2 per mile being more efficient due to lean burn. Also, diesels produce more carbon soot which might also result in less CO2 ? Its a little tricky

Excellent analysis and thanks a ton for sharing. All of us really wish that NGT would do at least some analysis than just make arbitrary decisions. Hopefully, now somebody will read this. I am sharing this on fb. Thanks again.

The Automakers need to approach the Central Government who in turn move the President to pass an ordinance. A completely arbitrary decision by the Apex court without applying logic or reason. Since when has NGT taken over the role of ARAI.
ARAI needs to be made a party, let the manufacturers preset their case and then pass an order. This is just absurd on the part of the SC.

Its perfectly fine to ban all diesels on basis of NOx emissions. Very expensive emission control systems are required to get rid of these. That is why you do not see diesel passenger cars in USA. Only very limited models with urea technology can pass these.

This liquid is a consumable which you fill in your catalytic converter. Its called diesel exhaust fluid.

So if NGT was worried about diesel emissions, they should have banned all diesel engined cars from plying on the roads. Newer Euro 4 vehicles pollute less than older Euro 3 cars, and banning new vehicles with 2000cc+ capacity which are anyways Euro 4 does not make sense.

A blanket ban on all diesel vehicles inside select cities can still be justified with hard data, but the 2000cc... that is just voodoo territory